Hungary will be one of the first of the transition economies to join the EU. Researchers claim that, whilst there are still changes to make, the transition has been made from a planned economy to that of a market economy. ( Agenda 2000, 1998). However, there is claimed to be a lack of enterprising managers as Hungary struggles to come to terms with its new identity, leading to a focus on the way in which organisations manage people. It is not surprising, that Human Resource Management ( HRM), with its focus on management development, is seen as the new magic which can create these managers. In this paper, we seek to challenge the view that what Hungary needs in transition is the wholesale adoption of HR practices. Rather, we would argue that what is required is a deeper understanding of both what we understand by HR practices, and of the cultural context in which such practices are being implemented.
We would question the rather simplistic assumption that HR practices will be necessarily helpful on two grounds. Firstly, we examine the notion of HR itself, and suggest that its conceptualisation is complex and problematic. We would argue that ‘managing people’ is a process that emerges from specific historical and cultural contexts, and therefore needs to be examined in this light before prescribing ‘best practice’ models. Further, we suggest that recent work in the UK and elsewhere on discipline in management practices may suggest that we need to be cautious in advocating or adopting such practices without sufficient reflection on the way in which such practices are adopted or implemented.
To illustrate this thesis, we first examine our current understandings of HR management, tracing its evolution from the formal management models of the USA into the UK, basing our discussion on Lawrence’s analysis ( 1993). We then chart the discussions and debate around the take-up of HR in the UK, noting that our conceptualisations and paradigms can be confused and contradictory. We argue, however, with Lawrence ( 1993) that the reasons that the HR rhetoric ( if not the practices) has been welcomed in the UK is due to a series of historical events which have created a particular set of conditions where the need for clear communication and motivation created through management development is seen to be particularly important. Here the promises of HR practices are particularly appealing ( see for example, Zimmerman, 1993).
We then show the evolution of ‘people management’ in the Hungarian context, tracing its emergence from planned to market economy. Drawing on history and past and contemporary literature, we trace the ways in which organisations have developed in the Hungarian context. We then suggest that, whilst there is a radically different history and set of attitudes to work in Hungary and the UK, there are some similarities in terms of the need for communication and motivation of the workforce which may lead to the take-up of HR rhetoric, if not practices. These conditions are such where management control is of the utmost importance, thus the disciplinary potential of such practices may well be actualised. Before such practices are implemented wholesale, we would argue, there needs to be more critical reflection on the nature of HR and the context in which it is implemented if Hungarian organisations are to evolve creatively from its dramatic process of change
